Remediation of acid mine drainage and immobilization of rare earth elements: Comparison between natural and residual alkaline materials

IF 3.1 3区 地球科学 Q1 GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS
Dileesha Jayahansani Kotte-Hewa , Delphine Durce , Sonia Salah , Carlos Ruiz Cánovas , Erik Smolders
{"title":"Remediation of acid mine drainage and immobilization of rare earth elements: Comparison between natural and residual alkaline materials","authors":"Dileesha Jayahansani Kotte-Hewa ,&nbsp;Delphine Durce ,&nbsp;Sonia Salah ,&nbsp;Carlos Ruiz Cánovas ,&nbsp;Erik Smolders","doi":"10.1016/j.apgeochem.2023.105800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Acid mine drainage (AMD) is a well-known source of toxic trace metals in freshwaters. Traditional passive treatment systems rely on AMD neutralization with limestone and removal of most common toxic transition metals such as Cu and Zn with little attention to rare earth elements (REE). Alkaline waste materials now receive increasing attention as low cost AMD treatment alternatives in the circular economy. This study was set up to identify the efficiency of alkaline waste materials remediating AMD and scavenging REE in addition to other toxic trace elements. An AMD sample was collected from a lixiviate coming from pyrite heaps in the Iberian Pyrite Belt (pH = 1.8, 30 μM ∑REY). The sample was treated with either blast furnace slag (BFS) generated during smelting of iron ore in a blast furnace or biomass ashes (BA) derived from combustion of biomass, thereby using analytical grade CaCO<sub>3</sub>, and NaOH as reference products. The batch alkalinization experiments were conducted by adding each alkaline material at an amount to obtain an equal pH to ≈6.5. The required amounts of the products were NaOH &lt; CaCO<sub>3</sub>&lt;BFS &lt; BA in line with their acid neutralizing capacities. The largest removal of sulfate from water was obtained in the CaCO<sub>3</sub> treatment suggesting gypsum precipitation which was lower with BA and BFS and virtually absent with NaOH, these trends were confirmed by SEM-EDX and XRD. Both BFS and BA removed more Fe than CaCO<sub>3</sub> and NaOH. The REE elements were well removed by all treatments (&gt;99%) and the remaining REE concentrations in the solutions were clearly lower than values for Cu and Zn. The Zn and Cu removals were not consistently high enough (except with NaOH) to meet environmental limits in the discharge waters. The largest efficiency for REE removals was obtained with CaCO<sub>3</sub>. Indirect evidence here suggests that gypsum is a better host for the trivalent REE than Fe(III) minerals in the precipitates. The ionic radii of trivalent REE are more similar to Ca<sup>2+</sup> than to Fe<sup>3+</sup>, explaining the better potential of gypsum as REE host. This study showed also the potential of BFS as alkaline agent for the remediation of AMD in terms of its higher alkalinity generation potential as compared to BA, thus making BA less promising than BFS.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8064,"journal":{"name":"Applied Geochemistry","volume":"158 ","pages":"Article 105800"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Geochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883292723002457","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Acid mine drainage (AMD) is a well-known source of toxic trace metals in freshwaters. Traditional passive treatment systems rely on AMD neutralization with limestone and removal of most common toxic transition metals such as Cu and Zn with little attention to rare earth elements (REE). Alkaline waste materials now receive increasing attention as low cost AMD treatment alternatives in the circular economy. This study was set up to identify the efficiency of alkaline waste materials remediating AMD and scavenging REE in addition to other toxic trace elements. An AMD sample was collected from a lixiviate coming from pyrite heaps in the Iberian Pyrite Belt (pH = 1.8, 30 μM ∑REY). The sample was treated with either blast furnace slag (BFS) generated during smelting of iron ore in a blast furnace or biomass ashes (BA) derived from combustion of biomass, thereby using analytical grade CaCO3, and NaOH as reference products. The batch alkalinization experiments were conducted by adding each alkaline material at an amount to obtain an equal pH to ≈6.5. The required amounts of the products were NaOH < CaCO3<BFS < BA in line with their acid neutralizing capacities. The largest removal of sulfate from water was obtained in the CaCO3 treatment suggesting gypsum precipitation which was lower with BA and BFS and virtually absent with NaOH, these trends were confirmed by SEM-EDX and XRD. Both BFS and BA removed more Fe than CaCO3 and NaOH. The REE elements were well removed by all treatments (>99%) and the remaining REE concentrations in the solutions were clearly lower than values for Cu and Zn. The Zn and Cu removals were not consistently high enough (except with NaOH) to meet environmental limits in the discharge waters. The largest efficiency for REE removals was obtained with CaCO3. Indirect evidence here suggests that gypsum is a better host for the trivalent REE than Fe(III) minerals in the precipitates. The ionic radii of trivalent REE are more similar to Ca2+ than to Fe3+, explaining the better potential of gypsum as REE host. This study showed also the potential of BFS as alkaline agent for the remediation of AMD in terms of its higher alkalinity generation potential as compared to BA, thus making BA less promising than BFS.

Abstract Image

酸性矿山废水的修复与稀土元素的固定化:天然与残留碱性材料的比较
酸性矿井排水(AMD)是淡水中有毒微量金属的一个众所周知的来源。传统的被动处理系统依赖于用石灰石中和AMD,并去除最常见的有毒过渡金属,如Cu和Zn,而很少关注稀土元素(REE)。碱性废料作为循环经济中的低成本AMD处理替代品,现在越来越受到关注。本研究旨在确定碱性废料修复AMD和清除REE以及其他有毒微量元素的效率。AMD样品是从伊比利亚黄铁矿带(pH=1.8,30μM∑REY)黄铁矿堆的浸出液中采集的。用高炉中铁矿石冶炼过程中产生的高炉矿渣(BFS)或生物质燃烧产生的生物质灰(BA)处理样品,从而使用分析级CaCO3和NaOH作为参考产物。分批碱化实验是通过添加一定量的每种碱性材料来进行的,以获得等于≈6.5的pH。所需量的产物是NaOH<;CaCO3<;BFS<;BA符合其酸中和能力。CaCO3处理对水中硫酸盐的去除最大,表明BA和BFS的石膏沉淀较低,NaOH几乎没有,这些趋势通过SEM-EDX和XRD得到了证实。BFS和BA对Fe的去除率均高于CaCO3和NaOH。所有处理都很好地去除了REE元素(>;99%),并且溶液中剩余的REE浓度明显低于Cu和Zn的值。锌和铜的去除率一直不够高(氢氧化钠除外),无法满足排放水中的环境限制。CaCO3对REE的去除效率最高。这里的间接证据表明,石膏是沉淀物中三价REE比Fe(III)矿物更好的宿主。三价REE的离子半径与Ca2+比Fe3+更相似,这解释了石膏作为REE主体的更好潜力。这项研究还表明,与BA相比,BFS具有更高的碱度生成潜力,因此使BA不如BFS更有前景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Geochemistry
Applied Geochemistry 地学-地球化学与地球物理
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
8.80%
发文量
272
审稿时长
65 days
期刊介绍: Applied Geochemistry is an international journal devoted to publication of original research papers, rapid research communications and selected review papers in geochemistry and urban geochemistry which have some practical application to an aspect of human endeavour, such as the preservation of the environment, health, waste disposal and the search for resources. Papers on applications of inorganic, organic and isotope geochemistry and geochemical processes are therefore welcome provided they meet the main criterion. Spatial and temporal monitoring case studies are only of interest to our international readership if they present new ideas of broad application. Topics covered include: (1) Environmental geochemistry (including natural and anthropogenic aspects, and protection and remediation strategies); (2) Hydrogeochemistry (surface and groundwater); (3) Medical (urban) geochemistry; (4) The search for energy resources (in particular unconventional oil and gas or emerging metal resources); (5) Energy exploitation (in particular geothermal energy and CCS); (6) Upgrading of energy and mineral resources where there is a direct geochemical application; and (7) Waste disposal, including nuclear waste disposal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信